On 8 Sep 2007 11:50:26 -0700, in bit.listserv.ibm-main
(Message-ID:<[EMAIL PROTECTED]>)
[EMAIL PROTECTED] (Gerhard Adam) wrote:
As for "being allowed" to learn ... There has NEVER been
more information available, nor more readily available
than today. There is absolutely no excuse for anyone that
wants to learn to suggest that they are being denied
access to information. Implicit in this statement is the
assumption that education is the company's
responsiblity. If we are "professionals" then education
is OUR responsibility. While it is a tremendous benefit
when a company elects to pay for such education, it is by
no means our right to have it at someone else's
expense. A company is not responsible for enhancing our
careers. If it is cheaper to educate staff rather than
bring in outside expertise, then it is likely that course
of action may be taken. While a classroom might be
easier, and a mentor can certainly be beneficial, the
suggestion of "not being allowed" is simply over the top.
Your reply to my last two paragraphs significantly
skews my position. Please reread my first paragraph:
I believe, as I always have, that the only way
towards expertise in mainframes is via mentoring. A
junior
sysprog needs to apprentice to a senior sysprog.
I am not talking about reading, lurking or
questioning online, or even classes. There are many things
that can be learned from people, but that can't be
taught. Constant exposure to a good senior sysprog will
leave a good junior sysprog with ideas, attitudes, and
competences that are not likely to arise any other way
within a reasonable number of years.
That is the kind of education that is the
responsibility of the companies; it's almost impossible for
an individual to obtain. Online, telephone, classes, and
two Shares a year cannot replace it. It's the knowledge of
when stay calm and when to go into a frenzy of problem
determination or amelioration. It's having available that
large memory of things that went wrong, without having to
find them all the hard way. It's learning by example what
knowledge it's important to memorize versus that which
should be looked up. It's many other things, most of which
I'll never be able to explain verbally, which is part of my
point.
A company that
doesn't want to pay for expertise will either learn the
hard way, or
discover that it doesn't need the expertise.
Any mainframe company without sufficient expertise is
bad for all of us. Mainframes already get bad press. Any
business failure directly relating to the mainframe will be
even worse. I don't want companies to die because they did
things wrong; I want them to live because they do things
right. The elementary level of some of the questions
showing up here and elsewhere show that they do need that
expertise. A well-run company can't pause for Usenet
responses *every time* something new comes up, even if it
can, sometimes.
I will continue to lurk, and to answer questions that
both intrigue me and that I may know the answers to. And,
obviously, to occasionally spout on-topic opinions.
--
I cannot receive mail at the address this was sent from.
To reply directly, send to ar23hur "at" intergate "dot" com
----------------------------------------------------------------------
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with the message: GET IBM-MAIN INFO
Search the archives at http://bama.ua.edu/archives/ibm-main.html
